Showing posts with label unemployment rate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label unemployment rate. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 22, 2010

TeaPartier Rand Paul Says: Suck It Up, Unemployed – Get a Job Already

First he stated he wanted to end the Civil Rights Act and allow discrimination against minorities in restaurants and businesses. Next he said he wanted to rescind the Disabilities Act saying those with disabilities should just stick to the first floor and deal with steps. Now, he is saying to the unemployed: Suck it Up! Go get a job! -- Rand Paul -- I say you are you are completely out of touch!
Blue Wave News reports:
Rand Paul, an eye surgeon and the Tea Party-backed Republican candidate for U.S. Senate in Kentucky, believes that the long-term unemployed of America just have their expectations set too darned high. According to Paul, the tens of thousands of Americans who have nearly exhausted their unemployment benefits and who will soon be in dire straits because the Senate failed to pass an emergency extension this month, could have had jobs a long time ago if they were just willing to settle for ones that paid less than the ones they lost. Paul, who apparently has never had the bad luck to experience long-term unemployment – the kind where jobs are already scarce, half your job market is looking for work, and there’s serious competition even for low-paying jobs you can’t get hired for anyway because your work experience screams “over-qualified” – got on the air Friday with Lexington radio host Sue Wylie and had the nerve to tell people who are desperate, demoralized and worried about destitution that their carefree lives of leisure need to come to an end. He called it “tough love.”

“As bad as it sounds, ultimately we do have to sometimes accept a wage that’s less than we had at our previous job in order to get back to work and allow the economy to get started again,” Paul said. “Nobody likes that, but it may be one of the tough love things that has to happen.” Possibly because his understanding of the plight of the jobless is so stunningly superficial and academic, Paul fully endorsed the Republican filibuster that successfully blocked passage of the $120 million bill that would have extended benefits for the unemployed.

Paul said he supports the filibuster. If the Senate thinks the bill is necessary, it needs to find the money to pay for it elsewhere in the federal budget rather than add to the $13 trillion national debt, he said. “It’s all a matter of making priorities,” Paul said. “Some tough decisions will have to be made.” Rand, have you ever had to decide which utility bill gets ignored this month because there simply isn’t enough money to pay all of them? Have you ever tried to find an outfit for a job interview by poking through the racks of worn, stained clothing at the Goodwill store? Have you ever spent time agonizing over whether your child’s cough was severe enough that it warranted a trip to the doctor, because if you spent money on an office call, you would be short on cash for food for the rest of the week?

Those are “tough decisions,” Doctor Paul. Those are cases of people “making priorities.” Families whose providers have been jobless for months or a year or even more are not living it up, sir. They are scraping to get by. If there are folks on unemployment who aren’t taking jobs because they pay less than their unemployment benefits, it’s not because they refuse to work for less than they made at their old jobs – it’s because they are barely making it as it is and can’t afford to take a penny less! If a family is struggling to make ends meet with unemployment benefits, how dare a man with a medical practice and family connections in politics lecture them about “accepting a lower-paying job” and act like cutting off the only money keeping them off the street is some sort of character-building exercise?

The long-term unemployed are not a bunch of lazy rabble who think they’ve found the perfect gravy train. You may think that once their benefits end, they will race right out and “find” jobs because they’ve just been kicking back collecting those checks every week. What about the people who wind up losing their homes, who end up in homeless shelters or on the streets? What excuse will your libertarian imagination dream up to blame those people for their plight? You want tough love, Doctor Paul, diligent healer of human vision? Ditch the rug. Nobody with working eyes believes that’s your real hair.

Monday, March 15, 2010

Unemployment Rates vs Salary vs Population - Data Proves Migrant Labor Does NOT significantly Impact High Unemployment Rates!

I am very curious about the unemployment rate in the US. Look at the map. The highest rate of unemployment is:
1. Michigan: 14.6 (Auto Industry)
2. Nevada: 13.0 (Gambling, Tourism)
3. Rhode Island: 12.9 (Fishing; AgJobs)
4. South Carolina: 12.6 (Textile; AgJobs)
5. California: 12.4 (AgJobs; Entertainment; Technology)
6. D.C.: 12.1 (Fed Gov & Professional Jobs)

Population doesn't seem to be a factor. Both the most populated state, California (37M) and Rhode Island (.49M) smallest state are in the top 5. Average Salary doesn't seem to be a differentiator. DC's average annual salary is 92.5K. South Carolina is 40K.

In some states, their Top Industry is a major factor. The devastation of the Auto Industry wrecked havoc on Michigan's economy and unemployment ratio ranking number 1 at 14.6%. The status of our country's overall economy wrecked havoc on Nevada's Gambling/Tourism industries. Rhode Island's small size may be a factor. One major layoff sends their rates into double digits. Experts say the reason for South Carolina's high rate is due to their non-unionization, making it easier for business to release their employees with little or no notice. Additionally, the NAACP has boycotted SC over the last several years due to their flying of the Confederate Flag at their state capital. They ask all minorities, minority owned businesses, not to frequent or purchase from that state. The NCAA also refuses to allow NCAA events in that state. With all of these boycotts and protests by these groups, it is sure to have an economic impact on their state.

California has their own unique problems. According to wiki, one major reason is the number of rich people in California: "in 2004, the richest 3% of state taxpayers paid approximately 60% of all state taxes. The taxable income of this population is highly dependent upon capital gains, which has been severely impacted by the stock market declines of this period." Additionally, Technology is a major factor: "California's economy is very dependent on trade and international related commerce accounts for approximately one-quarter of the state’s economy. In 2008, California exported $144 billion worth of goods, up from $134 billion in 2007 and $127 billion in 2006. Computers and electronic products are California's top export, accounting for 42 percent of all the state's exports in 2008."

However, when all is said and done, will Americans move to another state to find a job that pays less and has them work physically harder than their previous jobs? Additionally, does the fact that Americans are aging and the Boomer are rapidly approaching retirement age add into this equation? I think it does. Take for example an unemployed auto worker. Will he move to Texas to work on a construction job for $14 an hour in Texas' brutal summer heat (100+ degrees)? Will the unemployed Textile Worker in South Carolina move up to Northern Wisconsin to pick fruit and vegetables for $8 - $10 an hour? For those who say migrant laborers are impacting the unemployment rate in America, I say they are wrong. They have not studied the issues. The high Unemployment rate is NOT due to migrant laborers working. The Unemployment rate is primarily due to offshore outsourcing. We let Big Business do it and they do it. Americans, especially aging Americans, do not want the jobs, like I saw today, of construction work being subcontracted out to small companies run by ole boys who pick up day laborers.

Monday, March 1, 2010

Jim Bunning, Jon Kyl and Republicans Blatantly and Figuratively Flipping the Bird to Unemployed Americans!

Senators Jim Bunning, Jon Kyl, and the Republican Party are flipping unemployed Americans the bird! These Republicans whose votes under the Bush administration to provide the biggest tax cuts in history to the wealthy and provide extensive deregulations for big business which resulted in the economic tsunami we are currently in today and the loss of millions of American jobs causing the unemployment rate we have today, are heartlessly and relentlessly flipping the bird to the unemployed causing their unemployment benefits to be shut off last Saturday.

Today, Bunning "flipped the bird" to reporters who asked him to explain "why" he is doing this to unemployed Americans.

Almost in answer to this question, fellow Republican Jon Kyl, who is fortunate enough to receive a six figure income from the government for his current job as Senator, answered, "unemployment benefits make people not want to get a job; they are being paid even though they are not working." Millionaire Senate Paid Kyl seems out of touch, not realizing that the unemployed, even at the maximum pay, can only receive less than $400 per week, and even these benefits are Federally Taxed. Clueless Kyl doesn't realize that these unemployed, utilize these scant benefits to keep their children/families from starving.

Bunning's filibuster has not only stopped benefits to the desolate unemployed - impacting 400,000 starving Americans, his flagrant, clueless filibuster has caused a 21% cut in medicare fees, and caused 2000 Federal Transportation workers to be FURLOUGHED without pay.

When Bunning finally stops filibustering and the inevitable vote finally passes the bill, the lapses in Federal Pay will be repaid, but not without a useless cost to all of us taxpayers of millions of dollars to restart the programs. The unemployment benefits will be restored, but not without little Mary and baby Johnny from starving, without food or formula for a few days.

Ask yourselves why?

Because ole Bunning wanted to prove a point, as did ole Kyl. They are "saying" they do not want to increase our debt to China. While they never complained about the four trillion we borrowed from China during the Bush Administration for the wrongful war in Iraq, the massive tax cuts they granted the rich and the deregulation for big business, what they THINK they are accomplishing is sending a message to the crying poor American Families. "GET OFF YOUR KEESTER AND GET A JOB!" They say this as they are flipping you the bird!!

Monday, January 11, 2010

Readers Do You Agree? Unemployment Rate Artificially Inflated Until May/June

Readers,
I have a question about how the Dept of Labor calculates the Official (U3)monthly unemployment rate. (see definition below). My question is, since the Obama administration has extended the number of weeks of eligibility for unemployment, won't the official unemployment rate be skewed because those who would have been dropped (and termed "discouraged workers") at 26 weeks during the Bush administration are now receiving two or more extensions (52 and up to 76 weeks)?

I believe the calculation is:

Total # of Workers Unemployed (minus discouraged workers)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total # Workers Unemployed (minus discouraged workers) + Employed

example:

(1000 - 100)
-------------------------------- = 9% (vs 10%) and variance would continue to grow
(1000 - 100) + 9000 .. as # on extensions grow

As you can see, by the discouraged workers remaining in the equation vs being removed as they have in the past, the unemployed rate stays higher than without the unemployment extensions and these workers being taken out of the equation.

While I recognize these unemployment extensions are important and are needed, are they skewing the unemployment rate? If so, I speculate that the unemployment rate will stay at 10% until May/June timeframe since the bulk of the layoffs occurred at the end of 2008 (end of Bush term).

Once the chronically unemployed are removed from the equation, in May, it will appear there is a big improvement in our unemployment rate.

Shouldn't we talking about this?


Definition from Wiki:
The
Bureau of Labor Statistics measures employment and unemployment (of those over 15 years of age) using two different labor force surveys conducted by the United States Census Bureau (within the United States Department of Commerce) and/or the Bureau of Labor Statistics (within the United States Department of Labor) that gather employment statistics monthly. The Current Population Survey (CPS), or "Household Survey", conducts a survey based on a sample of 60,000 households. This Survey measures the unemployment rate based on the ILO definition. The data are also used to calculate 5 alternate measures of unemployment as a percentage of the labor force based on different definitions noted as U1 through U6:

U1: Percentage of labor force unemployed 15 weeks or longer.
U2: Percentage of labor force who lost jobs or completed temporary work.
U3: Official unemployment rate per ILO definition.
U4: U3 + "discouraged workers", or those who have stopped looking for work because current economic conditions make them believe that no work is available for them.
U5: U4 + other "marginally attached workers", or "loosely attached workers", or those who "would like" and are able to work, but have not looked for work recently.
U6: U5 + Part time workers who want to work full time, but cannot due to economic reasons.


Note: "Marginally attached workers" are added to the total labor force for unemployment rate calculation for U4, U5, and U6. The
BLS revised the CPS in 1994 and among the changes the measure representing the official unemployment rate was renamed U3 instead of U5.
The Current Employment Statistics survey (CES), or "Payroll Survey", conducts a survey based on a sample of 160,000 businesses and government agencies that represent 400,000 individual employers. This survey measures only nonagricultural, nonsupervisory employment; thus, it does not calculate an unemployment rate, and it differs from the ILO unemployment rate definition. These two sources have different classification criteria, and usually produce differing results. Additional data are also available from the government, such as the unemployment insurance weekly claims report available from the Office of Workforce Security, within the U.S. Department of Labor Employment & Training Administration.
..The unemployment figures indicate how many are not working for pay but seeking employment for pay.

Page Hits